wikiapedia_encyclopaediafandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:Wikipedia Encyclopaedia Wiki
|autoconfirmed| }} |maxarchivesize = 200k |counter = 193 |minthreadsleft = 3 |algo = old(3d) |archive = Talk:Main Page/Archive %(counter)d }} Category:Main Page discussions __TOC__ = Main Page error reports = = General discussion = In The News Four gloomy entries - I know it is in the nature of ITN, but ... Jackiespeel (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2019 (UTC) : The beginning of the year is a slow period as we don't yet have a lot of recurring events(that are usually more positive) for posting; we can only wait for events to happen that merit posting. We can also only consider what is nominated, if you know of articles about more positive events that may merit posting and are covered in the news, feel free to nominate them at WP:ITNC. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC) ::M The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC) :::Agreed, leave as it is. David J Johnson (talk) 09:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC) : I agree with . For consistency if nothing else, but it's long been known that straight-up black-on-white is not good design. — �� 02:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::Given the Blue, Green and Purple backgrounds, I think Black is working well. Agree, if it's not broke... - [[User:FlightTime|'FlightTime']] ([[User talk:FlightTime|'open channel']]) 02:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC) :::Also, I think this is skin specific I see (0,0,0) font on articles with monobook. — xaosflux Talk 17:10, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::What can seem more aesthetically pleasing to a committee of design academics is often not as accessible to the visually impaired or to ordinary people trying to read in bright sunlight. As a reference work, we should be committed to function over form, substance over style, and utility over appearance. Low contrast text is a terrible trend. Are the sources suggesting that high contrast causes eyestrain WP:MEDRS? I read that eyestrain is best prevented by focusing on something at least 20 feet away for at least 20 seconds every 20 minutes, and has little to do with the attributes of text unless they cause squinting. EllenCT (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::Known by whom? Because my personal experience and preference is completely contrary to that. I LOVE straight up black on white, it is much easier for me to read. --Khajidha (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2019 (UTC) Fully-protected edit request on 23 March 2019 This is really a bit of a trifle, but the OTD section headers in both of the above pages contain ellipses that should be removed, to match a similar edit on the actual Main Page. Also, the Yesterday page's OTD header could be changed to "On the previous day", to better correspond with the Tomorrow page's header. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 11:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC) : for the first part. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:47, 23 March 2019 (UTC) :: Could you also address the second part of my edit request, to change "Yesterday" in the the OTD header to "On the previous day"? It looks a bit odd as it stands. Thanks. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 14:55, 23 March 2019 (UTC) :::Are you sure about that? It seems a little stilted to refer to "on the previous day" rather than just "yesterday". Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC) :::: The Tomorrow page reads "On the next day", which, IMO, sounds better than simply "Tomorrow". The same should go for the Yesterday page. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 15:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::::: for the second part. I'm still not convinced that it's better, though this page is largely irrelevant. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::::::I think it is worse now. To be consistent with the TFA title, it should be "Yesterday's anniversaries" and "Tomorrow's anniversaries". Jmar67 (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC) ::::::: I would generally be fine with this proposal, as long as it is consistent across the pages (even though I would still prefer the current wording, as it more directly resembles the OTD header on the actual Main Page). RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 17:04, 23 March 2019 (UTC) :::::::I like this better too. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:27, 24 March 2019 (UTC) A disgusting punctuation error in a giant banner Look! A giant banner with a ridiculously disgusting punctuation error! Screenshot. "Hi reader in Ukraine," - the vocative case is only marked with one comma! If I understand it correctly, Wikipedia can't do anything about this banner, but it still exists right at the top of the Main Page! This shame should be corrected asap. Because this is worse than any ad.--Adûnâi (talk) 17:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC) : while we do not manage this directly here, there are a few ways for us to get it fixed. Can you reply with the exact change you would like to see in that banner? (e.g. Change "a a a" to "a b a"). Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 17:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC) :: A comma after Hi should be added - "Hi',' reader in Ukraine,".--Adûnâi (talk) 17:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC) ::: thanks for the note, I'm going to copy this to meta:User talk:TSkaff (WMF) - who it appears is the WMF resource that manages that specific campaign banner. — xaosflux Talk 17:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC) On this day Any reason why the Annunciation isn't mentioned alongside Bengali Genocide Remembrance Day? The Annunciation is an important date in the Catholic calendar that's been celebrated for centuries and occurs on 25 March. Just askin'. Bermicourt (talk) 07:55, 25 March 2019 (UTC)